Democrats are in a tizzy over a Trump administration lawsuit, claiming the legal action provides evidence that the White House will deny the results of the November election if Democrats make significant gains. That’s a stretch — and the Democrats are hardly innocent bystanders.

Last week, the Justice Department filed suit to stop Alaska from automatically certifying the results of its U.S. Senate election if incumbent Republican Dan Sullivan loses. The seat will help determine which party controls the upper chamber. The lawsuit is a long shot, to say the least. But the details are instructive.

Sullivan is in a tight contest with Democrat Mary Peltola, a former member of Congress. But there are nearly a dozen other candidates in the race — which will be decided by the convoluted process known as “ranked-choice voting.” The ballot also includes a man named Daniel J. Sullivan, who insists he is running on his own volition and did not enter the race at the behest of Democrats to confuse voters and siphon off support from the incumbent with the same name. Sure.

A New York Times reporter sent to The Last Frontier to investigate the controversy revealed that he “did not find case-closing evidence of either a Democratic plot or a fully independent campaign without ulterior motives.” He noted, however, that Daniel J. Sullivan admitted that he has never voted for Donald Trump, supported Ms. Peltola in her House races and attended at least one “No Kings” protest. The Wall Street Journal also noted “there’s evidence that a Democratic consultant … helped launch his campaign.”

The lawsuit argues that Daniel J. Sullivan entered the race intending to deceive voters, which violates federal law. Democrats counter that the legal action is an attempt by the Trump administration to interfere in the democratic process.

Attorney General Todd Blanche defended the lawsuit over the weekend, telling CNN that, “President Trump is not trying to take over a state election in any way, shape or form.” Instead, he said, “It is an obligation of the states to avoid confusion, among other things, confusion in the minds of voters in the election process.”

The judiciary will decide the merits of that position, but the White House is running uphill. The Alaska Supreme Court previously ruled that Daniel J. Sullivan may remain in the race, and the incumbent will be identified as such on the ballot to help voters differentiate between the two.

That said, before Democrats start in with accusations about election interference, they might want to explain what it’s called when you dig up Duplicate Dan to muddy the campaign and erode support for the Republican incumbent.

______

©2026 Las Vegas Review-Journal. Visit reviewjournal.com.. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.